Prospects for technology assessment in a framework of responsible research and innovation

Schomberg, René von

doi:10.1007/978-3-531-93468-6_2

Cited by 297 publications

(236 citation statements)

References 10 publications

(4 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

202

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Several other definitions also exist (see for instance Owen et al, 2014 [10] and von Schomberg 2012 [11]). However, most approaches to RRI include the following elements [12]:…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…As such it highlights the need for society to be involved in governing the purposes of scientific research and technology-infused innovation, acknowledging the centrality of values, interests and purposes in governance, and shifting the discussion from the control of adverse impacts to the orientation of research and technology development activities in order to achieve the 'right impacts' of and through innovation (von Schomberg, 2012 [10], 39). It is from this perspective that RRI has the ambition to integrate previous approaches to the governance of science and technology and research areas that are its direct antecedents, like technology assessment, ethics of technology, ELSA studies, anticipatory governance and public engagement in science and technology [11].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessment of science and technologies: Advising for and with responsibility

Forsberg

Quaglio

O'Kane

et al. 2015

Technology in Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Several other definitions also exist (see for instance Owen et al, 2014 [10] and von Schomberg 2012 [11]). However, most approaches to RRI include the following elements [12]:…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of science and technologies: Advising for and with responsibility

Forsberg

Quaglio

O'Kane

et al. 2015

Technology in Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These considerations call into question the widely shared assumption among TA proponents and some policymakers that TA and responsible innovation go hand in hand (Von Schomberg, 2012). Whereas TA is correctly ascribed great potential as a tool for strategic intelligence (Kuhlmann, 2001b) and democratic 22 These assertions are based on interviews the first author had with former IST staff, politicians, and implicated others; as is the understanding that "TA has politics" below.…”

Section: Discussion: Quo Vadis Ta?mentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Rendering explicit the interplay between TA and STI policies and institutions is hence important to understand longer-term STI dynamics, possibilities, and constraints both in and beyond Belgium, even when these possibilities are not immediately picked up or await enactment. It can also render explicit how the integration of social rationales into innovation elicits tensions and struggles among actors and programs, as prevalent policy concepts like open innovation or the presently fashionable notion of "responsible innovation" do not readily translate into innovation practice (Von Schomberg, 2012). The article thus paves the way for reflection on the evolving viability and utility of TA within contemporary KBEs, as TA and STI engage in an "innovation policy dance" (Kuhlmann et al, 2010, pp.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Broadening, deepening, and governing innovation: Flemish technology assessment in historical and socio-political perspective

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThis article examines the socio-political dynamics in the evolution and development of Flemish technology assessment (TA). Broadly defined, TA encompasses activities and programs that expand and deepen the knowledge base of contemporary knowledge-based economies (KBEs), typically by including new actors (e.g. trade unions), ideas (e.g. science in society), and rationales (e.g. participatory techniques) in science, technology, and innovation (STI) processes. Starting from the regionalization of STI policy in Belgium and the convergence of Flemish STI around global KBE principles, the article exemplifies how since the 1980s successive Flemish TA waves (early-warning, bottom-up, and interactive TA) have coevolved with successive generations of Flemish innovation policy. Building on these findings, it argues that Flemish TA has counteracted and accommodated dominant STI paradigms. By providing a historical and socio-political perspective on TA and innovation policy, the article draws critical attention to the institutional settings and societal contexts in which TA is embedded, and questions TA's strategic utility within contemporary KBEs. This perspective sheds light on the Flemish government's recent decision to close its parliamentary TA institute and the institutional expansion of TA elsewhere in Europe.

show abstract

“…René von Schomberg defines responsibility in science and technological innovation as 'a transparent, interactive process by which societal actors and innovators become mutually responsive to each other with a view to the ethical acceptability, sustainability and societal desirability of the innovation process and its marketable products' [73]. Responsibility therefore is a prerequisite for all NT stakeholders to internalise the social values from which ethical decision-making evolves and by so doing responsibility is actively taken rather than imputed.…”

Section: Responsibility and Future Care In Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anticipatory Ethics and Governance (AEG): Towards a Future Care Orientation Around Nanotechnology

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nanotechnology (NT) presents significant challenges in terms of developing a regulatory framework. This is due to a lack of scientific knowledge about the behaviour of the technology in its interactions with biological and ecological processes, the environment and other technologies. Crucially, there is a great deal of uncertainty surrounding the potential environmental and human health and safety impacts of NT. Consequently, the development of NT is a potential test case for framing new models of 'soft law' voluntary governance as a substitute for traditional command and control type regulation. Driven by 'new science governance,' an approach based on a combination of ideas in anticipatory ethics, future-oriented responsibility, upstream public engagement and deliberation and theories of justice may offer a solution. The uniqueness of the approach can be found in the incorporation of anticipatory approaches via public participation and deliberation as the input into procedural justice approaches with distributional justice as the output. The overarching objective of this work is to contribute to the discussion in relation to the internalisation of responsibility and the building of intellectual and societal capacity to anticipate negative consequences before they arise in the hope that such an approach could be the antithesis of the retrospective imposition of responsibility and liability after the harm is done, which is the outcome of traditional regulatory and ethical approaches. Ultimately, the purpose is to contribute to the long-term sustainability of NT.Keywords Anticipatory ethics and governance . Future care orientation . Nanotechnology . Public participation and engagement . Procedural and distributive justice . Regulation . Responsibility . Social and ethical issues (SEI) . Soft law . Uncertainty Nanotechnology (NT) could be considered to be a convenient short-hand label for a broad range of scientific domains and applications encompassing chemistry, physics, materials sciences, information technology, biotechnologies and agriculture at the atomic scale [33]. On that basis, NT is more correctly referred to as nanotechnologies. Its development and societal embedding follow a 'distributed innovation model' meaning that it comprises many heterogeneous actors with complimentary pieces of knowledge who form networks or creative communities, in which they cooperate in informal ways constructing the technology and its applications [21]. NT is subject to the paradigmatic dilemma of Nanoethics

show abstract

Prospects for technology assessment in a framework of responsible research and innovation

Cited by 297 publications

References 10 publications

Assessment of science and technologies: Advising for and with responsibility

Assessment of science and technologies: Advising for and with responsibility

Broadening, deepening, and governing innovation: Flemish technology assessment in historical and socio-political perspective

Anticipatory Ethics and Governance (AEG): Towards a Future Care Orientation Around Nanotechnology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About